This case was last updated from San Francisco County Superior Courts on 04/11/2016 at 16:35:07 (UTC).

JOHN MORIARTY VS. 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC et al

Case Summary

On 05/21/2012 JOHN MORIARTY filed a Property - Other Real Property lawsuit against 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC. This case was filed in San Francisco County Superior Courts, Civic Center Courthouse located in San Francisco, California. The case status is Not Classified By Court.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******0970

  • Filing Date:

    05/21/2012

  • Case Status:

    Not Classified By Court

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Real Property

  • County, State:

    San Francisco, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

MORIARTY, JOHN

Defendants

2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC

DOES 1 THRU 50, INCL

LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS

LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS

DOES 1 THRU 50, INCL.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

LIFSCHITZ, ERIC

Attorney at LAW OFFICE OF ERIC L. LIFSCHITZ

345 Franklin Street

San Francisco, CA 94102

Defendant Attorneys

DOWLING, CURTIS F

Attorney at DOWLING & MARQUEZ, LLP

703 Market St Ste 1610

San Francisco, CA 94103

NEVIS, CHRISTOPER J.

Attorney at LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH

333 Bush Street, Ste 1100

San Francisco, CA 94104

TORSNEY, PATRICK J

Attorney at LAW OFFICES OF BAKER & ASSOCIATES

655 North Central Ave, Ste 2100

Glendale, CA 91203

 

Court Documents

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 6.0 DAYS

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 6.0 DAYS

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT, PROOF OF SERVICE ONLY, FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN SERVED AUG-24-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

REPLY

REPLY DECLARATION OF CURTIS F. DOWLING FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

SURREPLY TO LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION'S SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE (ALLEGED SLAPP) FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

CLERK'S NOTICE OF FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT, PROOF OF SERVICE ONLY, FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN SERVED AUG-24-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 14.0 DAYS

Order Continuing Case Management Conference

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF JAN-23-2013 CONTINUED TO MAR-13-2013 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 610 TO OBTAIN AN ANSWER(S) FROM, OR ENTER DEFAULT(S) AGAINST, LARAMAR DEFENDANT(S). NOTICE SENT BY COURT.

53 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/20/2015
  • DocketMASTER JURY CALENDAR SET FOR FEB-09-2015 VACATED. DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION FIELD ON 12/2/14. (206)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/08/2015
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNOTICE OF ENTRY OF DISMISSAL AND PROOF OF SERVICE (TRANSACTION ID # 56573444) FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/12/2014
  • DocketCASE NOT ASSIGNED FOR MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/02/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketDISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION OF ALL PARTIES AND ALL CAUSES OF ACTION WITH PREJUDICE

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/04/2014
  • DocketREVIEW FOR MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/29/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketDISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/30/2014
  • DocketOBJECTION HEARING JUL-30-2014; JUDGE CYNTHIA M. LEE; CLERK KCOX; PROCEEDINGS NOT REPORTED (610)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/30/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL, JURY TRIAL SET FOR FEB-09-2015 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPT. 206.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/28/2014
  • DocketADDED TO CALENDAR FOR OBJECTION HEARING HEARING SET FOR JUL-30-2014 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPT 610

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/18/2014
  • DocketNOTICE OF OBJECTION TO THE COURT'S NOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL FILED BY DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
69 More Docket Entries
  • 10/04/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketOPPOSITION TO SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE (ALLEGED SLAPP) FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/25/2012
  • DocketCOURT REPORTING SERVICES LESS THAN 1 HOUR FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION (Fee:30.00)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/25/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketDECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/25/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketMEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/25/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF MOTION TO STRIKE FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/25/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketMOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT FILED BY DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION HEARING SET FOR OCT-18-2012 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:450.00)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/28/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketSUMMONS ON COMPLAINT, PROOF OF SERVICE ONLY, FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN SERVED AUG-24-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/28/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketSUMMONS ON COMPLAINT, PROOF OF SERVICE ONLY, FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN SERVED AUG-24-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/21/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNOTICE TO PLAINTIFF

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/21/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketQUIET TITLE - REAL PROPERTY, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MORIARTY, JOHN AS TO DEFENDANT 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS DOES 1 THRU 50, INCL. SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR OCT-24-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON JUL-20-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON OCT-09-2012 (Fee:410.00)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Complaint Information

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD &SVIH LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW WO 3 & BT W N

EREBEZEO SRFED B = ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As an eleventh affirmative defense, Defendants allege that, at all times, Defendants acted under legal right or in a good faith belief in the existence of a legal right.

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a twelfth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff cannot prove any facts showing that Defendants® conduct was the proximate cause of any injuries or damages as alleged

in the Complaint.

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a thirteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that by reason of Plaintiff’s own acts, omissions, representations and courses of conduct, Plaintiff is estopped from asserting, and has waived, any right to assert claims against Defendants.

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a fourteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Defendants were not provided a reasonable opportunity to cure defects alleged in Plaintiffs Complaint.

| FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Asa fifteenih affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff surrendered and

abandoned possession of the subject premises.

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a sixteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Defendants have actually

performed substantial rehabilitation work to the subject premises and, therefore, Plaintiff was not

damaged by the conduct of Defendants.

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a seventeenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that if hability is assessed against them, pursuant to Civil Code section 1431, et seq., Defendants shall be liable only for the amount of the non-economic damages allocated to them in direct proportion to the percentage of fault assessed against them by the tricr of fact and request that a separate judgment be rendered against

them only for that amount.

4825-1494-4795. 1 4 ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMBLLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW

L~ = < -~ = U - W [ al

gfigaamuflcwmqmmamur-c

EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As an eighteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff failed to give adequate notice of the alleged breach of the warranty of habitability, that there was delay giving notice of a breach within a reasonable time of discovering the breach of the warranty of habitability, or when Plaintiff should have discovered the breach of the warranty of habitability, and therefore Plaintiff’s claims are barred.

NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

| As a mineteenth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that should Plaintiff recover from

Defendants, that Defendants are entitled to indemnification, either in whole or in part, from all

persons or entities whose negligence or fault proximately contributed to Plaintiff’s damages, if any

there were.

TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a twentieth affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff’s Complaint is barred by the consent given by Plaintiff for Defendants to enter and by Civil Code section 1954, the landlord’s right of access to dwelling unit.

TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a twenty-first affirmative defense, Defendants allege Plaintiff substantially and materially breached the obligation/contract complained of prior to the commencement of this action, which conduct extinguishes the right to maintain the instant action.

TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a twenty-second affirmati've defense, Defendants allege that, at all times mentioned in

the Complaint, Defendants acted in good faith, with reasonable and probable cause for their

actions.

TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

As a twenty-third affirmative defense, Defendants allege that Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred because Defendants fully complied with all obligations imposed by case law, statute, contract(s), or any other source.

ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION » LARAMAR URBAN

Jonsl

CALIFORNIA STATE COURT PROOF OF SERVICE

Moriarty v. 2363 Van Ness Avenue, LLC, etal San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC-12-520970

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN F RANCISCO

At the time of service, I was over 18 yearsparty to the action. My business address is 333 Bush Street, Suite 1100, San Francisco, CA 94104-2872.

On June 10, 2014, I served the following document(s): ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION,

LARAMAR URBAN SPECIALTY PARTNERS, AND LARAMAR SF URBAN

APARTMENTS TO COMPLAINT OF JOHN MORIARTY W N A W N

I served the documents on the following persons at the following addresses (including fax numbers and e-mail addresses, if applicable):

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

11 The documents were served by the following means:

12 || Bd (BY U.S. MAIL) I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed above and placed the envelope or package for collection

13 and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice for collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that

14 practice, on the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the U.S. Postal Service, in a sealed

15 envelope or package with the postage fully prepaid,

16 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

foregoing is true and correct,

17 Executed on June 10, 2014, at San Francisco, California.

P At o

20 Carol Jensen |

4825-1494-4795 1 . ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN

4825-1494-4795 1 . ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN WOONJO\U‘:A(NN)—*

WOONJO\U‘:A(NN)—*

Yk <&

SERVICE LIST

Moriarty v. 2363 Van Ness Avenue, LLC, et al. San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC-12-520970

Eric L. Lifschitz, Esq. Patrick J. Torsney, Esq.

Aaron H. Darsky, Esq. Law Offices of Baker & Associates

345 Franklin Strect 655 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100

San Francisco, CA 94102 Glendale, CA 91203

T: (415) 553-6055; F: (415) 358-5647 T:(818) 638-8541; F: (818) 638-8549

Email: eric@franklinstreetiaw.com Email: ptorsney@offcofbakerandassoc.com aaron(@darskylaw.com | Co-Counsel for Defendant 2363 Van Ness

Attorneys for Plaintiff John Moriarty Avenue, LLC

Curtis F. Dowling, Esq.

Dowling & Marquez LLP

703 Market Street, Suite 1610

San Francisco, CA 94103

T: (415) 495-8500; F: (415) 495-8590 Email: curtis@dowlingmarquez.com Co-counsel for Defendant Laramar Management Corporation

2 ANSWER OF DEFENDANTS LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORFPORATION, LARAMAR URBAN

Tentative Rulings

Case Number:*******0970
Case Title:JOHN MORIARTY VS. 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC et al
Court Date:NOV-29-2012 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT
Rulings:Unlawful Detainer Law and Motion Calendar for Thursday, November 29, 2012, line 2. DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION's MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT.Hearing required. = (501/REQ)


Case Number:*******0970
Case Title:JOHN MORIARTY VS. 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC et al
Court Date:NOV-01-2012 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT
Rulings:Unlawful Detainer Law and Motion Calendar for Thursday, November 1, 2012, line 2. DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION's MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT.Continued to Nov. 29, 2012, court's own motion. Counsel submitted sur reply without court permission. = (501/REQ)


Case Number:*******0970
Case Title:JOHN MORIARTY VS. 2363 VAN NESS AVENUE LLC et al
Court Date:OCT-18-2012 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT
Rulings:Matter on calendar for Thursday, October 18, 2012, Line 12, DEFENDANT LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION'S MOTION TO STRIKE COMPLAINT.To be heard in Department 501, the housing court, on November 1, 2012 at 9:30am. =(302/HEK)


related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where LARAMAR SF URBAN APARTMENTS is a litigant

Latest cases where LARAMAR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer DOWLING, CURTIS F

Latest cases represented by Lawyer NEVIS, CHRISTOPHER J